Alleged Corruption of Officials
It is reported that in 2008 a FIR was registered against Goa Urban Development Secretary R P Pal and his wife for misappropriation and cheating the Corporation City of Panaji. Payments were allegedly made to labour under fake names, wife thumb prints, wages of servant working for them paid from Provoderia department under dubious name etc. A week after FIR was registered R P Pal was transferred to Lakshadweep and later moved to Pondicherry, where he retired honourably two years ago! Seven years later, the Panaji police have now moved the Judicial Magistrate First Class to close the case claiming no evidence against the duo! Justice appears to be stretched for those in power. It is also reported that the BJP has decided to brazen it out in Parliament and meet the onslaught of the Opposition regarding their politicians and officials alleged corruption and wrong doings by highlighting the Congress scams and their wrongdoings. They will also attempt to convince us that the present corruption is rooted in the past! Two wrongs do not make a right? The Congress was precisely thrown out and BJP mandated to serve for that very reason? Fourteen months into office, Prime Minister Modi assurances like zero tolerance for corruption, “na kharoonga, na kharne doonga”, transparent government etc has resulted in an uncharacteristic silence and firm swift action expected by public against wrongdoings not forthcoming. The standoff in Parliament where important legislation is being held up bodes ill for our nation!
John Eric Gomes, Porvorim
Yakub Memon’s Hanging
Now that Yakub Memon has been hanged, it is time we put an end to all further debates on television channels and print media on whether justice has been done or not after the Supreme Court turned down Yakub Memon’s mercy petition. It is a futile exercise and excellent time-pass with no useful purpose served. It is important to remember that we have a law in our country that confers death sentence on crimes of a heinous nature and on those which fall in the category of rarest of rare cases. Terrorism is one such crime, and the Supreme Court is the country’s highest judicial and final authority to decide whether a person should be hanged or jailed for life. Whether capital punishment serves as a deterrent or not for future crimes is a totally different subject. But, as long as we have a law for capital punishment, it is of utmost importance to respect the decision of the Supreme Court as final and put an end to unnecessary debate and bickerings which have the potential to escalate into communal conflicts of serious nature.
A F Nazareth, Alto Porvorim
Freedom of Women to Dress
This is with reference to the article ‘Women’s freedom to dress as they like’ (NT, July 30), as a rejoinder to my earlier piece pertaining to the dress code framed by CBSE for the All India Pre-Medical Test, banning the head scarves and long sleeves in the examination hall. The writer has said that the copying material can be hidden in pockets and waist lines pants too and has questioned whether the judiciary has framed a law banning wearing of pants for the exams. First and foremost it is not the duty of the judiciary to frame the law and neither the dress code for AIPMT exams was framed by it, but by the examining body CBSE, as they deemed fit. It is only when the Students Islamic Organization of India dragged the matter before the court that the Supreme Court delivered its verdict upholding the dress code, no doubt in the process slamming the religious diehards. Let us therefore not drag the judiciary in this conflict. I had written the article based on the verdict of the apex court for we have to keep aside our petty religious sentiments and abide by the law enforced by the state. Further the writer’s glorification of the burqa as a deterrent for crimes against woman is misplaced. No social activist would abide by this version. It goes to support the perpetrators of crimes against women that they are driven to the crime in view of woman’s dress. Let us rather say that irrespective of how the woman dresses in public she cannot be the target of man’s lust. Though in my writing I had confined only to the dress code within the precincts of the examination hall, the writer has dragged the matter further, trying to say that it is wrong to associate burqa with terrorism, though there are instances how criminal minded people have taken recourse in such concealed clothing. If not why is such dress banned in public places in a number of western countries?
Michael Vaz, Merces